Outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage: A multicenter study from India (with video).

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) offers a safe and minimally invasive alternative for percutaneous cholecystostomy (PCC) in acute cholecystitis patients with high-surgical risk. Additionally, EUS-GBD serves as a rescue biliary drainage in malignant distal biliary obstruction. Despite its widespread application, data within the Indian context remains sparse. This study aims to report the outcomes of EUS-GBD through the first multi-center study from India. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients undergoing EUS-GBD at six tertiary care centers of India from March 2022 to November 2023. EUS-GBD was performed by free hand or over-the-guidewire technique with lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) or large caliber metal stent (LCMS). The primary outcome was technical success (defined as successful deployment of stent between gallbladder and stomach/duodenal lumen). The secondary outcomes were clinical success (defined as resolution of symptoms of acute cholecystitis and more than > 50% reduction in bilirubin level within two weeks in distal biliary obstruction), adverse event rate, 30-day mortality rate and 90-day reintervention rate. RESULTS: Total 29 patients (mean age 65.86 ± 12.91, 11 female) underwent EUS-GBD. The indication for EUS-GBD were acute cholecystitis (79.31%) and rescue biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstruction (20.69%). LAMS was deployed in 92.86%, predominantly by free-hand technique (78.57%). Technical and clinical success rates were 96.55% and 82.75%, respectively. Adverse events occurred in 27.59% patients, with severe adverse events (bile leak and bleeding) being uncommon (10%). Both 30-day mortality rate and 90-day reintervention rate were 13.79% in patients. Cholecysto-duodenal fistula facilitated cholecystoscopic intervention and stone removal in one patient and transgastric EUS-GBD did not hamper bilio-enteric anastomosis during Whipple surgery in two patients. CONCLUSION: EUS-GBD is a safe and effective technique for managing acute cholecystitis in high-risk patients and for biliary drainage in cases with malignant distal biliary obstruction.

Technical tips for EUS-guided embolization of varices and pseudoaneurysms.

Backgrounds and Aims: EUS-guided vascular intervention has expanded the horizons of diagnostic as well as therapeutic interventions for vascular pathology. EUS-guided embolization is a commonly performed technique for the treatment of gastric varices. However, there is a lack of data on the standardization of the technique. Here, we review the techniques and difficulties encountered during EUS-guided embolization of varices and pseudoaneurysms. Methods: This article and accompanying video describe the EUS-guided embolization techniques for various vascular lesions. EUS-guided embolization was achieved by combination therapy using coils and cyanoacrylate. Complete obliteration of the lesions was documented on follow-up. The existing literature of EUS-guided embolization therapy is also reviewed. Results: Patients with various vascular lesions, including gastric varices, ectopic duodenal varices, and splenic artery pseudoaneurysms, were successfully treated with EUS-guided coil plus cyanoacrylate injection. Patients with gastric varices underwent treatment with 2 EUS-guided techniques: (1) direct puncture of the varix and embolization and (2) feeder vessel embolization. Following embolization, the absence of Doppler flow within the varix and pseudoaneurysm was documented. Conclusions: Techniques of EUS-guided embolization of varices and pseudoaneurysms are demonstrated. Understanding the techniques and the challenges encountered during therapy is crucial to optimize outcomes and reduce adverse events.

Endoscopic management of magnet ingestion and its adverse events in children.

Background and Aims: Magnet ingestion has recently increased among children. Multiple magnets can lead to serious adverse events owing to pressure necrosis of trapped bowel wall; therefore, urgent removal of the magnet is recommended. However, awareness of magnet ingestion and adverse events associated with it are lacking among the general population and some healthcare professionals. Herein, we demonstrate the adverse events associated with prolonged retention of ingested magnets and endoscopic management of ingested magnets in children. Methods: We present a case series of 3 patients with magnet ingestion. Foreign body ingestion was confirmed on fluoroscopy. After fluoroscopy, all children underwent EGD under propofol sedation in a left lateral position. A Roth net was used to remove magnets. Results: Three patients (median age 5 years), each with ingestion of 2 magnets of different shapes and sizes and with variable periods of ingestion, underwent EGD. In 2 patients, both magnets were Successfully removed. In 1 patient, 1 magnet could not be removed because it became dislodged deep in the jejunum. All 3 patients had developed magnet-related fistula (gastroduodenal: 1 patient; duodenojejunal: 2 patients). Patients with duodenojejunal fistula were managed conservatively. There was mild self-limited bleeding during magnet removal in 1 patient. There were no major adverse events related to endoscopic removal. Conclusions: Endoscopic removal of magnets is feasible and safe in children. Few patients with fistulas can be managed conservatively. There is an unmet need to increase societal awareness of magnet ingestions and adverse events associated with it.

Spontaneous Migration of Spiral Fin Overtube During Motorized Spiral Enteroscopy.

Motorized spiral enteroscopy (SE) is a novel technique for evaluation and management of small bowel lesions. Total enteroscopy rates are higher with SE. Power spiral tube with spiral soft fin helps in advancement of the scope. SE has low adverse event profile; however, perforation and pancreatitis have been reported. We report the unusual adverse event of power spiral tube with spontaneous dislodgement of spiral fin in 2 cases.

Safety and efficacy of different techniques in difficult biliary cannulation at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events (AEs) are commonly seen at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during difficult biliary cannulation (DBC). Therefore, attaining the right technique is essential to have improved outcomes. METHODS: Patients who had DBC over a 3-year period were assessed for outcomes. The protocol included double guidewire (DGW) technique, wire-guided cannulation (WGC) after pancreatic stent, precut sphincterotomy/fistulotomy, and EUS-guided rendezvous (RV). The success of various techniques and AE was studied. RESULTS: As per available case analysis, a total of 3680 patient details were assessed out of which DBC was noted in 471 (12.8%) patients with a mean (SD) age of 51.5 (17.4) years; majority being 330 (70.1%) males. Most patients underwent precut sphincterotomy 230 (48.8%); however, it was not successful in the first attempt in 10 (2.1%) patients with the success rate of 220 (95.6%). The success rate of DGW cannulation was 120 (95.2%), WGC after pancreatic stent was 64 (94.1%), EUS-RV was 34 (97.1%), and wire-guided repeat ERCP after 48 h was 10 (98.3%). AEs were noted in 52 (11.1%) patients. After precut, 32 (13.9%) patients developed AE out of which post-ERCP pancreatitis was noted in 20 (8.7%). Twenty-three patients had failed biliary access after all methods and 20 (86.9%) of those received successful percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. CONCLUSION: Repeat ERCP after 48 h and EUS-RV appear prudent for DBC. Precut remains one of the preferred choices for most endoscopists when there is no entrance to PD. Further utilizing an algorithmic approach can contribute to higher success rates without compromising safety.